PAGE 1 MINUTES OF THE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT MEETING HELD AT THE HILLS SHIRE COUNCIL ON TUESDAY, 30 APRIL2019
PRESENT
Cameron McKenzie Group Manager – Development & Compliance (Chair) Paul Osborne Manager – Development Assessment
Andrew Brooks Manager – Subdivision & Development Certification Angelo Berios Manager – Environment & Health
Tanya Otten Acting Manager – Regulatory Services Nicholas Carlton Acting Manager – Forward Planning Kristine McKenzie Principal Executive Planner
APOLOGIES
Craig Woods Manager – Regulatory Services
TIME OF COMMENCEMENT 8:30am
TIME OF COMPLETION 8:47am
ITEM-1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
RESOLUTION
The Minutes of the Development Assessment Unit Meeting of Council held on 23 April 2019 be confirmed.
ITEM-2 DA 923/2019/LD - DEMOLITION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES AND CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE STOREY DWELLING, SWIMMING POOL AND TENNIS COURT LOT 3 DP 286507, NO. 5 CLARKE WAY, KENTHURST
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF THE DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO ITEM 20(2)(c) AND (d) OF SCHEDULE 1 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING & ASSESSMENT ACT, 1979
DECISION
The application be approved subject to conditions as set out in the report with Condition No.
1 to be amended to read as follows:
PAGE 2 Development in Accordance with Submitted Plans (as amended)
The development being carried out in accordance with the approved plans and details submitted to Council, as amended in red, stamped and returned with this consent.
The amendments in red include:
- Three additional Lemon Myrtle trees to be planted alongside Tennis Court to OSD tank.
- All proposed boundary fencing is to not approved as part of this application. Any boundary fencing can be constructed by the applicant separate to this application provided the applicant meets the standards outlined in the Dividing Fences Act 1991, State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Codes) 2008 and restriction 17 of the 88B document. Any boundary fence is to be of an open rural style and consistent with the existing boundary fences.
REFERENCED PLANS AND DOCUMENTS
DRAWING NO DESCRIPTION REVISION DATE
H000 Roof Site/Analysis Plan H 18/02/2019
H1 Tennis Court Detail H 18/02/2019
H2 Ground Floor Plan H 18/02/2019
H3 Ground Floor/Section Plan H 18/02/2019
H4 Sections/Elevations H 18/02/2019
H5 Schedule of Colours and Finishes H 18/02/2019
A01 Landscape Plan B 07/03/2019
A02 Landscape Plan B 07/03/2019
A03 Landscape Details B 07/03/2019
101 Stormwater Concept Plan D 10/04/2019
No work (including excavation, land fill or earth reshaping) shall be undertaken prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, where a Construction Certificate is required.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION Section 4.15(EP& A Act) – Satisfactory.
LEP 2012 – Satisfactory.
SEPP BASIX 2004 – Satisfactory.
DCP 2012 Part B Section 1 – Rural – Variations required, see report.
Section 94A Contribution: $12.564.00
HOW COMMUNITY VIEWS WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN MAKING THE DECISION The development application was notified and one (1) submission was received, the issues raised were considered in the report.
NB: A further submission from an adjoining property owner was tabled and considered.
PAGE 3 ITEM-3 DA 377/2018/HC - CENTRE-BASED CHILD CARE FACILITY - LOT 200 DP 1177028, NO. 143 GLENHAVEN ROAD, GLENHAVEN
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF THE DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO ITEM 20(2)(c) AND (d) OF SCHEDULE 1 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING & ASSESSMENT ACT, 1979
DECISION
The subject Development Application be refused on the following grounds:
(1) The proposed development does not satisfy the relevant provisions of The Hills Local Environmental Plan 2012 and the RU6 zone objectives to guide the orderly and sustainable development of The Hills, balancing its economic, environmental and social needs; to provide strategic direction and urban and rural land use management for the benefit of the community (as it represents an overdevelopment and an over- intensification of use on the subject site).
(Section 4.15 1(a)(i) of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979).
(2) Development consent cannot be granted due to the inability to satisfy:
Clause 7.4 – Biodiversity (Terrestrial) under The Hills Local Environmental Plan 2012.
The proposal has not quantified ecological impacts on the Dooral Dooral Creek riparian corridor.
(Section 4.15 1(a)(i) & (b) of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979).
(3) The proposed development does not comply with the provisions of DCP Part B Section 1 – Rural in respect of:
Part 2 New Development – Site Coverage, Fill, and Wastewater.
(Section 4.15 1(a)(iii) of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979).
(4) The proposed development does not comply with DCP Part C Section 1 – Parking in respect of:
Part 2.1.2 Mixed Use Parking and Part 2.1.3 Dual Use Parking.
Part 2.8(a) Landscaping.
(Section 4.15 1(b) & (c) of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979).
(5) The above non compliances contributes to the proposal representing as an overdevelopment and an over-intensification of use which adversely impacts on the local rural-residential locality and the subject site is not suitable to accommodate the two separate large commercial uses. The cumulative impact of the proposal is unreasonable.
(Section 4.15 1(c) of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979).
(6) Insufficient information has been submitted in support of the application in accordance with Clause 50 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulations (EPAR) 2000: -
• The adequate provision of wastewater, stormwater, parking, driveway access and resource recovery arrangements has not been provided.
• Flora, fauna, tree and bushfire protection has not been maintained.
(Section 4.15 1(a)(iv) of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979).
(7) The development is considered not to be in the public interest.
PAGE 4 REASONS FOR THE DECISION
Section 4.15 (EP &A Act) – Unsatisfactory, see report.
SEPP Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities 2017 – Complies.
The Hills LEP 2012 – Unsatisfactory.
DCP Part B Section 1 – Rural – Unsatisfactory.
DCP Part B Section 6 – Business – Satisfactory.
DCP Part C Section 1 – Parking – Unsatisfactory.
DCP Part C Section 3 – Landscaping – Unsatisfactory.
Section 7.12 Contributions - $16,206.00
HOW COMMUNITY VIEWS WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN MAKING THE DECISION The development application was notified and three (3) submissions were received, the issues raised were considered in the report.
NB: A further submission from the applicant (Ray Brown) was tabled and discussed at the meeting.
